Who serves first after a tie-break?

[New Daddy]

1. I thought whoever served last in a tie-break receives first in the next set, but Del Potro, who served last in the tie-break against Isner, is serving first in the second set.
What's the rule?

2. Somewhat related question: do you switch ends after a tie-break?

 

[Solat]

whoever serves first in the TB is counted as their game so they receive the first game next set

you change ends as it's scored as a game, 7/6 odd number.

 

[B-rian]

haha whoa! I encountered the same problem after pulling through a second set tiebreak to get to a third set lol but I ran over to my coach and she said that the person who receives first in the tiebreak, serves first in the proceeding set. And I'm pretty sure you switch after the tiebreak since it would then be 7-6 which is odd.

 

[New Daddy]

whoever serves first in the TB is counted as their game so they receive the first game next set

you change ends as it's scored as a game, 7/6 odd number.

Wouldn't that disadvantage the player who serves first in the TB in theory?
If a tie-break is really down to the wire with no mini-breaks, then the player who serves first will face a set point first (at 5-6).
I don't know, but that sounds like a disadvantage if he has to bear the pressure of a set point first and cannot serve first in the next set.

 

[Chris De Tone]

It sounds complicated, but it really is not. The player that serves first in the breaker, served first in the set. So that player already had the first advantage. Just keep it simple...the tie-break is treated like a game. If you serve the first point of the breaker, your opponent starts serving at the beginning of the next set...be sure to switch as well!

 

[Rickson]

Whomever served the first point in the tiebreak, receives first in the next game. Serving the last point of the tiebreak has absolutely nothing to do with who serves in the next set.

 

[Thirteen]

so if i'm serving first in the tiebreak, and the score reaches 6-0, we swap sides, i win the next point, we swap sides again because it's 7-6?

 

[Steady Eddy]

so if i'm serving first in the tiebreak, and the score reaches 6-0, we swap sides, i win the next point, we swap sides again because it's 7-6?

Yep. The tie-break's over, so you switch. The fact that you just switched one point ago is a coincidence. This wouldn't happen often, but in this scenario you'd switch two points in a row.

 

[Solat]

Wouldn't that disadvantage the player who serves first in the TB in theory?
If a tie-break is really down to the wire with no mini-breaks, then the player who serves first will face a set point first (at 5-6).
I don't know, but that sounds like a disadvantage if he has to bear the pressure of a set point first and cannot serve first in the next set.

no disadvantage at all, its actually in place to ensure that the same player doesnt serve first in both sets (which is an advantage - despite Gilbert's opinion)

 

[Rickson]

You switch sides in the next set according to the 7-6 score and not when you switched sides because you got to 6 points twice or 3 times. However many times you reached 6 points has nothing to do with the next set. Only from where the first server of the tiebreak served.

 

[woodrow1029]

You switch sides in the next set according to the 7-6 score and not when you switched sides because you got to 6 points twice or 3 times. However many times you reached 6 points has nothing to do with the next set. Only from where the first server of the tiebreak served.

Wrong. You switch sides based on where the tiebreak FINISHED.

 

[circusmouse]

no disadvantage at all, its actually in place to ensure that the same player doesnt serve first in both sets (which is an advantage - despite Gilbert's opinion)

To be fair, Gilbert suggested opting to receive in the first set in order to get a little extra warm up time before serving in order to increase the chances for a hold. I think he would agree that serving first is an advantage in every other set. I believe someone did some statistical analysis of this theory and found that serving first is an advantage in every set except the first.

 

[mikeler]

For some reason I always find it easier to remember it this way. Say my opponent served first to start the first set. After the 1st set tiebreaker, to be fair I get to serve first to start the 2nd set.